Canadian solidarity activist Joanne Naiman takes on the new Canadian Parliamentary coalition to Combat Anti-Semitism, and unmasks its agenda:
Is antisemitism in fact growing in Canada? I am a sociologist, and in the submission I made to the CPCCA in the summer of 2009, I made clear that all the traditional data used to assess the level of prejudice and discrimination towards groups, such as income, discrimination in hiring & housing, educational level, hate crimes etc., do not indicate that this is the case. Does antisemitism in all its odious forms exist in Canada? Certainly. Is it expanding and intensifying? No. Nonetheless, and without any supportive evidence, the CPCCA website states that “the extent & severity of antisemitism is widely regarded as at its worst level since the end of the second World War” and “recorded incidents of antisemitism have been on the rise both locally and globally.”
...To give you a true sense of the Kafka-esque nature of this committee, one of the first speakers to be called was Irwin Cotler, [a member of the Coalition's steering comittee and head of a Canadian Jewish congress too]...
It’s not hard to see that if one accepts Cotler’s premise that Israel is what he calls “the collective Jew,” then any criticism of the State of Israel is, de facto, anti-Semitic. There can be little doubt, therefore, that this Coalition will soon be putting forward recommendations to the government that certain criticisms of the State of Israel within Canadian universities and in the media should be defined as a form of antisemitism, and therefore an incitement to hatred. Thus, in the strange Alice-in-Wonderland world we’re now in, those who stand up and charge Israel (correctly) with gross violations of both the Geneva Conventions and of international humanitarian law may soon find themselves charged under section 319 of the Canadian Criminal Code and section 13(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Act, or else silenced by judicial warrants of seizure issued under section 320 of the Criminal Code. We can assume that this would include calls for Boycott, Divestment & Sanctions, as well as using the term “apartheid” to describe the actions of the Israeli state....
Without a doubt, the main purpose of this redefinition of antisemitism is to create a serious chill on university campuses and in the media. Teachers will be afraid to discuss Israeli policies in their classrooms, while Israeli Apartheid Weeks will be prohibited by administrations on campuses across the country for fear of being charged with inciting hate crimes. Likewise, articles critical of Israeli government policies or actions (as rare as they are) will likely disappear from the print and electronic media. It is possible that websites could be shut down. Organizations critical of Israel will be unable to rent public venues for meetings. Already, I’ve heard that some Palestinian support groups fear they may be charged under hate laws. In other words, what we will be seeing, in fact are already seeing, is a new form of McCarthyism. For me, as a Jew, one of the worst ironies here is that should such legislation actually come to pass, as seems likely antisemitism will actually increase. As Bahija Reghai has noted, by equating Jews with Israel and Zionism, the CPCCA reinforces “the reductionist and false notion that all Jews are responsible for the acts of the state of Israel.” It is worth noting that this past Wednesday (January 27), speaking at Auschwitz-Birkenau, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu referred to himself as “leader of the Jewish people."...
As I noted at the outset, the term “solidarity” is not just about pity and charitable handouts. What is happening to the Palestinian people today will likely have serious consequences for us here in Canada tomorrow. However, history has shown that the degree to which governments, all governments, take away peoples’ democratic rights and freedoms to serve their own ends always depends on the degree to which we allow them to get away with it. Together, let’s insure that the current government doesn’t take away our right to free speech.
As I said on another thread earlier today, this is old wine in new bottles. People are dragging out too many dirty details, just cut off the debate. The coalition ignored the usual parliamentary authorization; is in fact not authorized as its name suggests. Canadian democracy was skirted to use the state to suppress free speech, to label
those Canadians critical of Israel’s policy as anti-semites.
The Coalition’s stated objective is to include criticism of
Israel in an expanded version of existing Hate Crimes legislation. In addition, consideration is being given to
doing something similar with respect to Canadian Human Rights legislation.
It is the view of CPCCA ex-
officio member Irwin Cotler, Israel is “the collective Jew among nations.” From this perspective, criticizing
Israel is the same as discriminating against Jews.
The CPCCA accepts some criticism of Israel may be legitimate. But it also declares that criticism of Israel as
a Jewish State – rather than a state where all citizens enjoy equal rights – is inherently antisemitic. That calling
Israel’s treatment of its Palestinian citizens apartheid is antisemitic. And that supporting the growing international
Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign by those determined to change Israel’s behaviour is antisemitic.
Ironically if this expanded definition of antisemitism becomes legislation, it will be possible to criticize
the actions of the Canadian government but not those of the government of Israel. Just the fear of being
prosecuted is likely to create a “chill” on both university campuses and in the media. But why should Israel be the one country in the world we are not allowed to criticize?
link to seriouslyfreespeech.files.wordpress.com
VANCOUVER- In a direct attack on freedom of expression, Canwest has launched an unprecedented civil lawsuit against local activists. They are being sued for “conspiring” to produce and distribute a four-page parody of the Vancouver Sun which satirised Canwest’s biased coverage of Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestinian territories.
Canwest is the largest media corporation in Canada. In 2003, Canwest’s founder, Izzy Asper, boasted “In all of our newspapers… we have a very pro-Israeli position…” A 2008 editorial in Canwest’s flagship National Post declared that “Israel is blameless” for the killing of Palestinian children by Israeli army shelling and referred to the “Palestinian people as one collective suicide bomber”.
link to seriouslyfreespeech.wordpress.com
I can appreciate the parameters of identifying antisemitism by the author, however the fact of the matter is the governments definition of “collective Jew,” in both the USA and Canada is antisemitic. I would say that most of us, both in the USA and Canada, do not like to be identified with a racist, murderous colonial official policy. In fact, there are probably a good number in Israel that do not want to identified in this fashion.
So if anyone wants to make a contrary impact to this forced definition, that all Jews are inherently Zionists (and all of the atrocities implied) IS antisemitism. Until the collective community that does not agree with these governments definitions rises up and disputes them vehemently, they will be tossed into the dragnet of this antisemitic activity of their own governments.
reminds me…
ah, desperation rears its ugly head … israel has been trying to do this from the beginning: associate zionism with being a jew – nevermind that judaism has been around for nearly 6000 years and zionism just over 100 (or 1/60th that time) … but now the screws are being tightened about as far as they can go without a fascist regime in charge – this absurd attempt to pervert anti-discrimination laws will fail utlimately and just weaken the zionists’ cause further
risking repetition –
US of A HAS A SIMILAR LAW ON ITS BOOKS.
Public Law 108-332, The Global Antisemitism Review Act. link to thomas.loc.gov
Doing, saying, or thinking insensitive things about Jews, Israel, or zionism — no exceptions if the insensitive thoughts, words or deeds are TRUE or not — means a person on the payroll of US Taxpayers, with offices in the State Department (by way of Israel), will contact your government and expect that government to put a stop to the un-Zoroastrian activity or ELSE.
on the other hand, it’s grand to see that the ethic that underlies Iranian culture, Good thoughts, Good Words, Good Deeds is enshrined, at least obliquely, in US gov’mint processes.
Harper government is applying more ‘anti-Semite’ charade than any other ZOGs.
According to Toronto daily The Globe And Mail, Canada’s junior foreign minister, Peter Kent, in an interiew with one of Canada’s Israeli Hasbara publications Shalom Life said that Stephen Harper government is ready to throw its full military weight behind the Zionist entity, saying: “An attack on Israel would be considered an attack on Canada”. Kent’s chief of staff, Norm McIntosh defended his boss by telling the newspaper that “It’s not too far from what the prime minister (Stephen Harper) has said”. Stephen Harper and his immigration minister Jason Kenney who supported Israeli genocide of 1.5 million Gaza inhabitantans during Dec.-Jan. 2009 – are known for their blind support for Israel and their hatred toward Arab and Muslim communities in Canada (Edward C. Carrigan in The Canadian Charger, Feb. 10, 2010).
link to rehmat1.wordpress.com
If it becomes a crimal act to criticise Israel in USA and/or Canada, as well it might, considering, and the courts (our dear, dear SC so in love with the big-money boys, would be no help), then only in Israel (but for how long?) might criticism of Israeli actions (or of Israel intrinsically) still be possible.
So, then, people would have to write:
“I am not permitted to criticise Israel and of course I do not do so. Instead I describe Israel, its history and its recent doings. I have not yet heard that describing facts is ever a crime (altho stating facts as to people may be libel or slander, with the greater the truth the greater the slander). Here are the facts: BLAH BLAH. How I do love Israel!”
Several points worth noting: First, Israel is to a certain extent a Jewish collective insofar as the State of Israel serves a similar function in regards to the American Empire as the historical Jewish community did to the local Gentile Nobility in relation to the Gentile peasants. The Jewish State assists the US Empire in subjugating the local natives in pursuit of important geo-strategic objectives. This needs to be qualified insofar as Jews currently comprise a significant part of the Capitalist Nobility, and have a vested ideological interest in Palestine. Zionism is the secular religion of the Jews, providing organization and solidarity which greatly benefit’s the Jewish elites. Make no mistake, the Zionists are a power seeking collective.
Second, as has been noted by others (Israel Shahak for one), Canada is even more rabidly pro-Zionist than the U.S. (the elites, at any rate). This is consistent with other Canadian foreign policy actions concerning Haiti, Honduras, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. In fact, the myth of Canadian liberalism notwithstanding, I am of the opinion that at this point in time, Canada (as run by the Canadian elites) is to the right of the U.S.
Finally, as relates to my second point, I’m somewhat at a loss to explain why Canada would be more pro-Zionist than the U.S. True, Canadian Jews are disproportionately in the Canadian ruling elite, but more so than in the U.S.?
I agree with you that Zionism is becoming (has become?) the secular religion of Jews, but the idea that the U.S. is using them to advance its interests I think is wrong. I also think it is wrong to look at Israel as the collective Jew when less that half of the Jews live there and only a very small minority give real support (money or lobbying) to Israel in the U.S. and Canada. Not to mention there are anti-Zionist Jews.
I also don’t agree with your analogy regarding Jewish middlemen and gentile peasants. Israel may have been a strategic asset during the Cold War when Soviet-backed Nasserism was prominent in the Arab world and Iran was pro-Western. This situation is no longer the truth. Israel is a millstone; U.S. interests in the Mid-East are about oil, hegemony, containing or stopping Iran from going nuclear, and prevention of terrorism. Israel hurts U.S. attempts to do any of these things. I no longer buy the argument that Israel is the American spearhead in the M.E., I think that the power of the Israel lobby is getting the U.S. to support Israel beyond its interests.
The other scary thing about this is that if Israel is the collective Jew, all Jews are potential targets. That means that bombing a synagogue in Paris or New York becomes justified if Israel does something that people don’t like. It essentially says there are no civilians in a conflict, so everyone is a target. What better way to fuel terrorism?
Even if Israel is a collective Jew (a very dubious proposition, but let’s leave that aside for the moment), are they trying to say any Jew, collective or otherwise, is forever beyond reproach? Cuz that’s clearly madness. Is any criticism of the Vatican beyond the pale because it’s a collective Catholic? Come on.
JSC- The founding fathers of Israel always conceived of Israel serving the needs of some European Empire, and tried to sell the idea to Britain (ultimately successfully), Russia, Nazi Germany (believe it or not), and the Ottoman Empire. It was sold as an “outpost of civilization as opposed to barbarism,” as Herzl phrased it to the Ottoman Sultan. Ben-Gurion reportedly couldn’t conceive of Zionist Israel being able to achieve its goals without Imperial support. Both the U.S. and Israel see Israel as a U.S. strategic asset, more so since the fall of Iran. The end of the Cold War changes nothing. The control of the world’s hydrocarbon reserves is a core U.S. geo-stategic objective. Israel functions as a sort of U.S. “French Foreign Legion”. A bit unpredictable, but immensely valuable nonetheless, and much cheaper than a permanent occupation. Much freer to act too. Israel has numerous “red lines” that would trigger an attack against its neighbors. Should a “radical nationalist” (as defined by US/Israel) come to power in Egypt lets say, the government’s actions would be severly constrained due to the well understood threat.
As for Israel being a Jewish collective, my only point was that the state of Israel was performing a somewhat traditional service to elite power, not that Jewishness and Israel are synonymous. Zionists (Jewish and Gentile) bear some responsibilty for Israel’s actions to the extent that they support Israel and its actions, just as Americans bear responsibity for the actions of the U.S. Empire to the extent that they support and enable those actions. I might add that I agree with Noam Chomsky that we need to be talking about US/Israel actions. The two military states have a perverse, mutually reinforcing relation to one another.
For a more detailed discussion, go to link to saskck.blogspot.com
and click on “Perverse Triangle”